I can point out two reasons why I see this situation much different than yourself (and perhaps others)

- nothing 'almost' worked with Bosh. They won 47 games one year and got bounced out of the playoffs.

- I don't see Lowry as 'top calibre'.

And while I agree that Val/Ross/Lowry is perhaps the best young players this team has had in a long while (although I don't quite define Lowry at 26 and 7 years experience as 'young' by NBA standards but thats not here nor there), thats also a function of how poor of a job this organization has done over the years. Its the result of Colangelo building low standards

Back to back playoff appearances and a game-away playoff appearance. Not pretty, but counts as almost, i would think. The problem was they tried to build around Bosh instead of building with him, and clearly Bosh was no franchise player. I think what theyre doing now is avoiding that mistake by trying to fill holes in the roster rather than building around one player.

fair enough. do you see Jose as top-calibre?

I dont get your last point. Isnt it a good thing that we now have a good, young core moving forward with, even if its a product of past mistakes?

2. Calderons contract is expiring. What he makes today is irrelevant to his next contract, which is the one I'm concerned with. Lowry's contract ends in a season and a half, at which point he is getting a new one to (with no guarantees he stays).

3. I've made the case for Jose numerous time, and I highly doubt repeating it would have an influence on you. You've already stated that you believe this team can't win with Jose. So what could I possibly say to change that? His numbers and his consistency speak for themselves. And if the team goes with Jose should you trade KL? Yes. Said that already to, also mentioned how since this team needs to rebuild and Lowry could easily be the best trade peice they have it may make the most sense to trade him peroid. And there is a fair case for trading both.

There is no guarantee that Jose will stay either. There is no reason for us to trade are best player in his prime.

I never said he would. In fact I've said before the first order of business is to see what Jose would even be interested in taking, let alone taking a contract at all with Toronto. If its not a reasonably priced contract or a big ole negative from him any debate regarding him is moot - he's off to the highest bidder or seen as cap space this summer.

Its the one advantage this team has right now is they can figure out what Jose thinks he's worth and then use that as a starting point.

Glove -

fair enough. do you see Jose as top-calibre?

No.

1. How do you know which player is better?

? Reinholt claimed resigning/starting Jose would be the same mentality as what Colangelo did with Bargnani and Demar. With which I responded with :

its the exact opposite mentality than overpaying Demar and keeping Bargnani. Jose is a good quality player that has proved it through consistency over the years. The advanced metrics you speak of regarding Lowry say that about Jose. He HAS produced. Demar and Bargnani not only have not produced, but have been rewarded for being net negative players whose entire role was based on 'potential' . The world of difference between those two ideas (ie. net productivity vs net liability and consistency/reliability vs potential) is enourmous.

he took that as I was comparing Lowry and Calderon. But thats not what I was getting at. (I was saying Calderon's numbers show Calderon is productive, efficient and consistent - something they never have with Demar or Bargnani. Demar/Bargnani situations were based on potential, Jose's would be based on results)

If you are asking who do I think is a better player, I think its Lowry. But the marginal difference between Lowry and Jose isn't that big. And with both their contracts ending in the near future, both to be on new ones (Jose's likely to be much much lower than Lowry's), and the need to rebuild (and therefore both should be seen as assets to that end) keeping Lowry just because he's a 'better player' is fools gold.

I never said he would. In fact I've said before the first order of business is to see what Jose would even be interested in taking, let alone taking a contract at all with Toronto. If its not a reasonably priced contract or a big ole negative from him any debate regarding him is moot - he's off to the highest bidder or seen as cap space this summer.

Its the one advantage this team has right now is they can figure out what Jose thinks he's worth and then use that as a starting point.

Glove -

No.

? Reinholt claimed resigning/starting Jose would be the same mentality as what Colangelo did with Bargnani and Demar. With which I responded with :

he took that as I was comparing Lowry and Calderon. But thats not what I was getting at. (I was saying Calderon's numbers show Calderon is productive, efficient and consistent - something they never have with Demar or Bargnani. Demar/Bargnani situations were based on potential, Jose's would be based on results)

If you are asking who do I think is a better player, I think its Lowry. But the marginal difference between Lowry and Jose isn't that big. And with both their contracts ending in the near future, both to be on new ones (Jose's likely to be much much lower than Lowry's), and the need to rebuild (and therefore both should be seen as assets to that end) keeping Lowry just because he's a 'better player' is fools gold.

None of this means I'm against trading Jose or keeping Lowry.

I can't remember where I read it but there was speculation he would command $6-$9M. Personally, I wouldn't pay it. MLE absolutely.

I can't remember where I read it but there was speculation he would command $6-$9M. Personally, I wouldn't pay it. MLE absolutely.

And I agree, I think I posted before in another thread I think 4 or 5 mil (depending on the length) is what I'd like to see. I'm also fully expecting Lowry to command in the 12 mil+ range assuming nothing drastic changes.

And I agree, I think I posted before in another thread I think 4 or 5 mil (depending on the length) is what I'd like to see. I'm also fully expecting Lowry to command in the 12 mil+ range assuming nothing drastic changes.

So you are holding Lowry accountable for what? Casey running a terrible offense and leaving Bargnani in the starting lineup when he wasn't trying? Getting injured and trying to come back because the team needed him and playing when not 100% healthy?

I'm not sure what you hold him "accountable" for in this case.

He's the better player by virtually every metric other than assist percentage. The team had a better record with him out because they played weaker opposition and swapped Bargnani out of the lineup. Lowry has looked fantastic in the past few games and Jose has looked slow (and both are battling injuries now, so this is closer to a fair comparison).

For instance, if the Clippers insisted on playing a super-stiff in their starting lineup, and opened the season by losing several in a row to the Spurs, Grizzlies, Warriors, and Thunder, then CP3 got injured, Bledsoe came in, they simultaneously benched the stiffs, and then ran over the Bobcats, Raptors, Kings, and no-center Lakers, would you bench Chris Paul? That would be insanity.

Again, this is not to say Lowry is the long term answer, especially with the current supporting cast. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't; Jose is not. That's obvious. No advanced statistics support Calderon, no team winning percentage over a full season against non-cupcake opponents, and no playoff success over multiple years for Jose. It's pretty obvious that Jose is either a low end starter or a high end bench player in the NBA (and the latter is what he could be on a contender or strong playoff team). Everything points that way.

On the other hand, as previously stated, most advanced statistics love Lowry, his teams have been consistently strong despite sub-par talent (seriously, could Calderon have taken the Houston team Lowry was on to 4 games over .500 in a much tougher western conference?). None of this means Lowry is a savior. But he's cheaper than Jose for the next two years, will be far more valuable as an expiring contract next year, and might be good.

I literally don't understand the arguments for keeping Calderon. Why should the Raptors pay more for mediocrity with no upside and bury their best player (again, that's not a great feat on the Raptors right now, but it's still something) to do it? I mean, what is the argument for keeping Calderon if your goal is to contend for a championship, or at a bare minimum, a top-4 seed in the long run? Keeping JC is exactly the same mentality that lead them to overpay DeRozan and kept Bargnani in the starting lineup.

I'm reading this thread and I just don't understand Craiger's position

What is your argument exactly? That everyone is mediocre so we should keep them?

Keeping Jose is a short term mentality anyway you slice it. It has nothing to do with who is better (although you seem to be one of the only people who thinks they are at the same level), it is simply a matter of us having a good trade chip in Jose, and a talented pg in Lowry.

Why keep two players who are productive when we are so unproductive at other positions? Why keep a player in his 30's when we have a better one in his 20's?

I just don't understand your plan here? Is there some context that I am missing?

Talking point guards, I do like Trey Burke in the draft. Actually reminds me of Lowry but better shape and better passer in college (comparing assist and turnover stats of both in college).

Trade Jose in February - get mid 1st pick
Draft Burke
Trade Lowry in February '14
Start Burke in '14-15

How about that loyalty? lol

There is a reason I referred to Trader Matt on a few occasions... Just curious, what percentage of your fantasy team do you trade every year?

$12M a year for Lowry is overpaying; he has not done anything yet to justify such a salary. Some people on these boards call him a winner and I just don't see what this is based upon. He's a good player and I would prefer we keep him instead of Jose due to being younger, but at $12M at year, he better improve a lot or this is just another overpaid player on the roster.

There is a reason I referred to Trader Matt on a few occasions... Just curious, what percentage of your fantasy team do you trade every year?

$12M a year for Lowry is overpaying; he has not done anything yet to justify such a salary. Some people on these boards call him a winner and I just don't see what this is based upon. He's a good player and I would prefer we keep him instead of Jose due to being younger, but at $12M at year, he better improve a lot or this is just another overpaid player on the roster.

Percentage of team traded? Very little.

Pretty sure I agreed $12M was an overpayment. That is what I meant by a tough pill to swallow. In other words, I would not pay Lowry $12M per season. My apologies if I was clear on that. The sequence I laid out (in jest) would also not see the Raptors pay KL$12M. He is under contract at a team option of $6.2M next season.

I'm reading this thread and I just don't understand Craiger's position

What is your argument exactly? That everyone is mediocre so we should keep them?

Keeping Jose is a short term mentality anyway you slice it. It has nothing to do with who is better (although you seem to be one of the only people who thinks they are at the same level), it is simply a matter of us having a good trade chip in Jose, and a talented pg in Lowry.

Why keep two players who are productive when we are so unproductive at other positions? Why keep a player in his 30's when we have a better one in his 20's?

I just don't understand your plan here? Is there some context that I am missing?

My argument is that we just shouldn't be so quick about the idea of trading Jose or just because Lowry is better the team keeps him and trades Jose.

Jose is a good trade chip - but so is Lowry. Arguably a better one.

Lowry is a talented PG - but so is Jose. And I do think Lowry is 'better', I just don't that gap is a large as some think.

I don't think the team should keep 2 productive players at the same position - I think they should trade one, if not possibly both in the right circumstance (ie. the right return)

Jose is in his 30s, but he also plays a game that lends itself to a long shelf life mitigating some of the concerns about his age. Also Lowry's injury history combined with his style of play shouldn't be ignored as an additional risk

Then there is contractual considerations.

There is alot more to considering which direction this team should be heading (in regards to their PGs) than Lowry is 26 and 'better' than Jose, therefore trade Jose. If this team wasn't in a position that they should rebuild and/or Lowry was on a long term contract I'd say the above makes total sense and wouldn't question it. But since neither of the above are true (in my opinion) alot changes. There are alot of ways to 'slice' resigning Jose as not being short term thinking when you start looking at the risk vs reward of the long term potential of multiple opporunities.

My argument is that we just shouldn't be so quick about the idea of trading Jose or just because Lowry is better the team keeps him and trades Jose.

Jose is a good trade chip - but so is Lowry. Arguably a better one.

Lowry is a talented PG - but so is Jose. And I do think Lowry is 'better', I just don't that gap is a large as some think.

I don't think the team should keep 2 productive players at the same position - I think they should trade one, if not possibly both in the right circumstance (ie. the right return)

Jose is in his 30s, but he also plays a game that lends itself to a long shelf life mitigating some of the concerns about his age. Also Lowry's injury history combined with his style of play shouldn't be ignored as an additional risk

Then there is contractual considerations.

There is alot more to considering which direction this team should be heading (in regards to their PGs) than Lowry is 26 and 'better' than Jose, therefore trade Jose. If this team wasn't in a position that they should rebuild and/or Lowry was on a long term contract I'd say the above makes total sense and wouldn't question it. But since neither of the above are true (in my opinion) alot changes. There are alot of ways to 'slice' resigning Jose as not being short term thinking when you start looking at the risk vs reward of the long term potential of multiple opporunities.

So the bottom line is, you dont think both PGs are good enough as the future PG of the Raps, but if one stays and the other one is traded, youre ok with it as long as they dont keep both?

1 - Advanced metrics don't love Jose. His PER, Win Shares, most plus/minus metrics etc. are all inferior to Lowry. Basically, once you start getting into metrics that can account for Jose's defense and his offensive limitations against teams with speed/length, he's not even in the top half of starting PGs in the league.

2 - I don't think I overvalue Lowry at all when he's getting paid half of what JC is and signed for twice as long. Do you think JC is twice as good as Lowry? If not, keep KL and trade JC. When you consider contracts, age, and defense, there's no reason to go with JC that I can see.

3 - If you aren't going to go with KL, what is the case for JC? What is the team's upside with him, and what makes him a starting caliber PG for a consistent playoff team, which should be the goal (at a minimum)? And, in that case, should you trade KL?

Lowry's PER is higher than Jose's but the difference is not particularly wide and both are well above average. Calderon's win shares are actually higher than KL's, albeit lower on a per 48 minute basis. Once you get into the metrics that account for Jose's defense... they actually show that Calderon has been a better defender this season than Lowry (Lowry's opponent PER = 19.3 Calderon opponent PER = 15.2). Most of the +/- numbers that I have come across also show that Calderon is doing better in that regard than Lowry this season.

I am not one of the people who thinks Jose is the long term answer at point guard for the Raptors. If he is brought back on a reduced salary for 2-3 years after this one, with the plan for him to be backup, I would be okay with it. I would also be fine with him moving on, and using the cap space to fill other holes on the roster.

However I have to agree with a lot of what Craiger is saying. Prior to getting himself hurt in the Portland game, Lowry was not playing very well and the team was rapidly spiralling out of control. Define it however you like; hero ball, selfish, or whatever, Lowry was still able to post decent numbers for himself but was not playing in a way that was conducive to winning basketball. Their terrible record and the fact that he was called out by his teammates and lumped into the same category as Bargnani following the Denver game speaks volumes.

When Calderon took over after that, the team enjoyed a dramatic shift for the better. They scored more and with an efficiency that put them in the top tier of the entire league. They allowed less points to be scored on them. For the first time all season, they enjoyed ANY type of sustained success and appeared to be gaining traction. Yes, I understand the schedule was soft, but the team lost plenty of winnable contests early on in the season with Lowry leading the way. Besides, I think when a young team like the Raptors begin to take care of business in the games that they should, it's a good start.

I think Calderon has earned the right to start for the time being, and I'm not sure why the fans are so against that idea. The concept that players should be given minutes and starting roles based on what they should be doing, their NBA live rating, etc. instead of how they are contributing to a winning basketball situation is what got the Raptors so deeply into the Bargnani fiasco. If the team goes back into the tank and Lowry is outplaying Calderon again then I am all for switching it up and giving the most deserving of the two the starters role. However sometimes I feel like the narrative surrounding each player - Lowry is the pitbull from Philly while Calderon is the soft, European loser - becomes more important to the fans than what is actually happening on the court.

Yes, it sucks that Colangelo gave up a lottery pick for a player that is currently a backup. That is just another case of terrible asset management from one of the worst GMs in the league. But it is not Calderon's fault, nor is it Lowry's, so trying to allocate playing time based on that is only going to compact the original error.